Hi Sandro,
This is an official response to RDF-ISSUE-130: Properly referencing the
DOM Futures spec, which is being tracked here:
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/130
You were concerned that the way we refer to the WHATWG DOM4 Futures
specification from the JSON-LD API specification may not be acceptable
for a W3C Recommendation.
You did some digging (thank you!) and outlined a plan that would take us
into CR and to REC:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013May/0260.html
The JSON-LD group agrees with and supports your findings and has updated
the reference to the spec here:
http://json-ld.org/spec/CR/json-ld-api/20130822/#bib-DOM-WHATWG
Since you are the person that proposed the plan, we are assuming that
this resolves RDF-ISSUE-130. Just to make certain there are no other
issues, please respond to this email as soon as you can to verify that
your concerns related to RDF-ISSUE-130 have been addressed.
-- manu
--
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Meritora - Web payments commercial launch
http://blog.meritora.com/launch/